October Board of Ed in sum? And a few thoughts

Including the part that I just tweeted because my laptop had died? The MASC report is over here.

A few post-meeting thoughts (I usually do this on Twitter, but I drove today, so no train time):

• Chair Sagan seems to be developing a line in dad jokes. 
• Even Board of Ed members want to know why the Red Sox parade can't be on a weekend.
• Meetings are better when students present (note: also true of school committee meetings). 
• It is about dang time the Board of Ed is paying any attention to the foundation budget (thus this tweet); no, Holyoke is not leading at all on this, but they did manage to get it to the Board's attention, three years after the Foundation Budget Review Commission issued their report. 
• What the heck is with the Governor needing his own report on this for "policy"? Are any of those reports going to be made public (let's assume 'no' and get our Public Records Requests ready)? Is there any aspect of this that hasn't already been exhaustively considered in the THREE FULL YEARS we've had a report and the SEVEN since we first got MassBudget's "Cutting Class"?
• It's extremely clear that the Secretary doesn't like the notion of not being able to move the levels and make districts dance for their money. What was that about Republicans and local control? 
• Why is it that it seems to be escaping those who issue licenses that making it more expensive is not going to get you more teachers? And that the very areas in which we need growth--teachers of color, teachers of low income backgrounds, teachers of multiple languages--are those most impact by barriers like money and the MTEL? This is a real problem.
• There is a HUGE gap between the message that is being put out--and it's a united front on this one--from the state on the new accountability standards and the districts that are still running around, comparing scores with their neighbors and being sure that someone's going to show up next week and take them over and fire people (or charterize them). If, like me, you listen to both, it's a severe case of whiplash. It's been the message from the new Commissioner dating back to his interview--I mean, the Board knew what they were getting on this--that more support for teachers, less heavy hand of judgment was where he was coming from. He's also been very, very explicitly reserving judgment on the new accountability system. And the new accountability system itself was already explicitly less heavy hand: more variables, intentional emphasis on everyone having a lowest group to work with, intentional push towards school and district goals. It's about school and district targets rather than statewide comparison. I'm not sure how much more they can jump up and down about this to get it across, but it sure isn't landing in the field yet. 
• It was an absolutely unified voice today about protecting the rights of our LGBTQ kids. That doesn't happen a lot at the Board. Vote Yes on Question 3. 

October Board of Ed: LOOK act

update on where we are now, after Board updated regulations in June
new process for starting new programs

And the LOOK Act implementation; regs were updated in June #MAEdu pic.twitter.com/hxlwHTptZO

— Tracy O'Connell Novick (@TracyNovick) October 30, 2018

will provide support for districts around what research says; webinar, training
ongoing technical assistance
quick reference guides and forms
bilingual education endorsement for teachers

Oh, jeez. WE CAN’T FIND THESE TEACHERS ALREADY!!! #MAEdu pic.twitter.com/LdgxAVwg9q

— Tracy O'Connell Novick (@TracyNovick) October 30, 2018

core content teachers who teach English learners in a language other than English must obtain the new endorsement
one year waiver allowed by Commissioner
grandfather clause for those with three previous years in a bilingual setting
transitional bilingual education and transitional bilingual learner endorsement are equivalent
guidelines for higher ed programs just sent out with rolling approvals
guidelines for MTEL

Seal of biliteracy: high level of proficiency in English and a second language beginning with class of 2019
two tiers: seal and seal with distinction: in order to get it:
English: all graduation requirements AND ELA competency OR proficiency determination
Second language: minimum of "intermediate high" on ACTFL (American Council on Teaching of Foreign Language) which is a 4 on an AP or several other assessments OR alternative method by Department

guidance around Parent Advisory Councils: proposed regs (603 CMR 14.09)

SEI endorsement for career vocational technical educators

West: do the two tests authentically assess the same thing (ELA MCAS doesn't test the same things that the foreign language tests do; are we testing literacy or something further); and are the standards the same?
McKenna: not adding another test; are there other ways to show this?

October Board of Education: accountability

There's a memo here, but there's a PowerPoint presentation here, too, which I'll grab some charts from.
Riley: get an overall impression of how we're at

October Board of Ed: FY20 budget

Craven: annual letter that the Board sends to the Secretary for consideration
process by which Ch.70 is being evaluated
"how the Department should talk with that"
"I think there were ten working groups on aspects of the foundation budget"
"we do know that in a district as small as Holyoke...having no answer over time isn't an answer"
the letter says "be directed to districts with identified achievement gaps in student learning to support reforms that have evidence of narrowing achievement gaps"

October Board of Education: opening remarks and STEM panel

The meeting begins at about 8:30; the agenda is here. Posting as we go once it starts.
Sagan calls the meeting to order and has no opening comments
no public comment today

Riley: "I was under the impression that I could cancel the Board meeting if the Red Sox win; I was disappointed to find that this was not the case"
Sagan quips that it is the reverse; he can cancel for a period of reflection if they lose

The Worcester School Committee meets November 1

You can find the agenda here.
There are a number of recognitions, including a request for a letter (a letter?) to congratulate Elm Park on exiting Level 4 status.

First up, the report of the superintendent is the accountability report. If you follow state reports, a lot of this will look familiar, as Worcester's doing something valuable here: more than half the presentation is explaining how the accountability system has changed. (More of this!) To do this, they've essentially swiped the DESE slides in walking through how it has shifted (this is not an easy thing to explain; I'll be interested in how it goes!) for the first half. The second half is Worcester data and (sigh...how about we don't do this) comparing Worcester results with other urbans. What I don't see here--I'll be interested to see if it comes up--is some discussion of what in particular are the areas of needed focus within the district and school by school.

The Administration is forwarding "for informational purposes" (hmph) job descriptions for two new positions: Assistant Director of Finance and Operations for Nutrition and Marketing, Communication, Initiative and Outreach Coordinator. There's no public backup.

The administration has given the Perkins grant allocation, as requested.

The ongoing saga of chasing homeschooling families around on paperwork has a response back from administration. By my read, the form doesn't appear to agree with what's said in the report, for starters. 

The administration has responded to the request that administration clarify with staff participation in the electoral process by...sending them back the committee-approved policy GBI.

Miss McCullough is seeking a possible policy on lunches (the length of them, particularly in elementary schools); a review of IT password creation and security; and a review of the recess policy "to ensure it is being adhered to districtwide" (that's school committee agenda-speak for "it isn't; let's fix that").

Mr. O'Connell is asking about possibly renting modular classrooms for Burncoat Prep (This would be additional modulars, as Burncoat Prep already has several).

There are also donations:

• $1381.09 to Worcester Arts Magnet School from the Parent Teacher Group for the purchase of a new water fountain 
• $1090.00 to Tatnuck Magnet School from various donors through fundraising efforts 
• $2500.00 to the Worcester Public Schools from DonorsChoose.org 

...and prior fiscal year items:

• in the amount of $7,724.18 to Wheelabator Millbury, Inc.
• in the amount of $238.39 to Home Depot Credit Services.
• in the amount of $241.65 to Northeast Electrical Distributors.
• in the amount of $172.50 to Signet Electronic Systems, Inc.

There is a 6pm posting for an executive session for collective bargaining with Tradesmen, Plumbers and Steamfitters, and Aides.

The Board of Ed meets October 30

...and the agenda looks a bit different...
The Board of Ed meets Tuesday for the month of October. You can find their agenda online here.

After opening remarks, first up is a panel of STEM educators, as this current week has been declared STEM week in Massachusetts (please tell me we will be having a "Humanities week" as well.)

Being couched differently than in other years ("Student, School, and District Performance Results" with a h/t to whomever at the Department is ensuring Oxford commas are used), the accountability report comes before the Board on Tuesday; this will be both MCAS results (there's a link on the memo to a summary of results) and the overall accountability information. (I'm also finding "will join us for the discussion" versus "will be available...to answer your questions" to be an intriguing decision on phrasing.)

Chronically underperforming schools are reporting out; for simplicity's sake, let's call these the receivership schools (the memo is a Word doc).

There will be a report of the budget committee on FY20.

The Board will get an update on implementation of the LOOK Act.

Thanks to Mary Ann Stewart for asking the question; the Commissioner is sending along a memo on Question 3 and its possible impact on schools. In sum, the regulations on schools would not be changed if Question 3 fails (remember, a "yes" vote keeps the laws as we have them, including public accommodation); I'll add a note that this doesn't change the harm this would do to students everywhere else that they go.

Also being sent to the Board, but not on the agenda: an update on early college (full update coming at the January joint meeting with the Higher Ed board), a report on grants received by the Commissioner (another Word doc), a memo on the scheduling of district reviews (which sounds like a "don't have too many people bugging the district at once" thing), and a fairly lengthy memo on charter reauthorization. 


And yes, there will be liveblogging.